get_recent_activities

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It does disclose that this is a read-style listing and enumerates returned metrics, which is useful. However, it does not mention ordering, default count, time window limits, or units, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short, functional sentences with no filler. The action and resource are front-loaded, and the return fields are listed concisely. Every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple one-optional-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is close to sufficient: it names the resource and the expected data. Yet it omits any explanation of the count parameter and provides no routing guidance relative to get_activities_by_date, so it is not fully self-contained.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention the only parameter, count, at all. There is no explanation of how count controls the number of returned activities or what the default represents, so the parameter is effectively undocumented.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb ('Get') and the resource ('most recent activities/workouts'), and lists the returned fields. This distinguishes it from date-based siblings such as get_activities_by_date and detail-focused tools like get_activity_details.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_activities_by_date or get_activity_details. The phrase 'most recent' implies a use case, but the description does not state exclusions, scenarios, or sibling conditions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.